What had happen' was.....

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Answering Muslims: Andrew Klavan: Multiculturalism Explained

David Wood called my attention to the following video by Andrew Klavan. He makes the point of absurdity of moral relativism. I was thrown by the video at first because in my experience, we Americans usually does not equate "multiculturalism" with "moral relativism" but I get what Klavan is getting at. I don't think Multiculturalism must take the form that Klavan is advocating against. I see nothing wrong with respecting other people's customs and languages as valid as your own as long as they are giving the same to you - you know like not threatening to kill you, flying airplanes into your building, or changing your laws to make it okay to kill your children for not choosing to follow their culture. I don't see how multiculturism must lead to moral relativism. All cultures are equally valid in that every human being needs salvation from our sins. All moral claims however are not equally valid. Klavan covers many of those reasons.

Answering Muslims: Andrew Klavan: Multiculturalism Explained

Answering Muslims: James White Responds to . . . Total Nonsense

David Wood posted a summary of the rebuttal video to Ivey Conerly's and Dr James White's video that was in itself a rebuttal to this video by Kamal Saleh. I posted a blog post containing those videos here. I just loved David Wood's comment.

In response to the videos we watched yesterday [a few days ago from today's perspective] , Muslims posted one of their famous "You-can't-make-me-believe-because-I-refuse-to-think" videos:

And Here is Dr White's Response

Answering Muslims: James White Responds to . . . Total Nonsense

Friday, February 3, 2012

Fistbump of the Day: dangerous idea: Is Reasonable Faith an Oxymoron?

Dr. Victor Reppert has written a very insightful post that I think should be repeated:

Faith does seem to involve believing in spite of something. Atheists jump on this and say that what believers are talking about is believing in spite of having no good reason to believe it, and good reason to not believe it.

However, we can, for example, trust that a spouse is going to be faithful even though the spouse is out of our sight. In fact, the Apostle Paul contrasts faith with sight, not reason. Unless seeing is the only way we can have a good reason to believe something, it does seem to me that we cannot say that reasonable faith is an oxymoron by definition.

I agree with him and I find that many Atheist make that mistake because they don't know what "Biblical faith" is. They even make the mistake of missing the obvious that there is no reason to reject anything of great importance if the best you can do is point to the improbability of it. And then to get mad at other who are unconvinced of the lack of evidence? Makes no sense.

dangerous idea: Is Reasonable Faith an Oxymoron?

Thursday, February 2, 2012

FacePalm of the Day: Debunking Christianity: "Why We Must Treat the Bible No Differently Than Any Other Book" By Biblical Scholar James A. Metzger

John Loftus posted the following comment from Dr James A. Metzger

...many theologians and biblical scholars continue to speak of the Christian God in only the most sterling manner: as, for instance, all-loving, just, infinitely wise, and inexhaustibly merciful. But this is not the God of the Bible – not even close. If that were the God of the Bible, I would retain little respect for its authors, who would have proven themselves far more interested in promoting a fiction they liked than in bearing witness to the terrible, unpredictable Power they felt best accounted for (often unseemly) facts on the ground. There’s just no way that the omnibenevolent, all-wise Sovereign of traditional Christianity created and presides over this place. No, if there’s a God at all, he’s likely just the sort we find in the Bible – magnanimous and cruel, loving and spiteful, noble and base, impulsive and deliberate, intelligent and incompetent, responsible and spectacularly negligent. A little like us, in fact, but with a lot more power. Link

This is really amazing...but not in a good way. Metzger seems to think that there is a conflict between describing God as "all-loving, just, infinitely wise, and inexhaustibly merciful" and the actions of God in the Bible. I disagree. There is no contradiction. I think Metzger is confused because he mistakenly thinks that the Bible describes a god like us despite all of the chapters and verses describing how God is not like us at all.

Here are just two but there are loads of others

⁶ Seek the LORD while he may be found;
   call on him while he is near.
⁷ Let the wicked forsake their ways
   and the unrighteous their thoughts.
Let them turn to the LORD, and he will have mercy on them,
   and to our God, for he will freely pardon. ⁸ “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
   neither are your ways my ways,”
            declares the LORD.
⁹ “As the heavens are higher than the earth,
   so are my ways higher than your ways
   and my thoughts than your thoughts.
¹⁰ As the rain and the snow
   come down from heaven,
and do not return to it
   without watering the earth
and making it bud and flourish,
   so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,
¹¹ so is my word that goes out from my mouth:
   It will not return to me empty,
but will accomplish what I desire
   and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.- Isaiah 55:6-11

And

¹⁹ God is not human, that he should lie,
not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
Does he promise and not fulfill?- Numbers 23:!9

Metzger seems to be making a major mistake. Where the Bible tells of God's justice and punishment of sin, he fails to see that it does not mean that God is not benevolent or loving. He is like a child who pouts because of his being chastised and disciplined by his parent - although he knows he deserves it. Metzger makes the same mistake many Christians make in thinking that God is just a buddy - an equal. God is not like that at all. "Sovereign" is too small a word to describe God's authority., power, and the right to do anything pleases and how he pleases it - even if we don't like it. God is so much in control, he even allows us to not like it so that we know just how much we need God. It's a blessing. You get to understand God better and yourself as you understand your relationship with God better. God always causes His people to triumph, but we don't get tell God what that triumph looks like - He tells us. Recall that God does give us mercy but He decides to whom, when, and how much.

¹⁴ What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! ¹⁵ For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
¹⁶ It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. ¹⁷ For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” ¹⁸ Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
¹⁹ One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” ²⁰ But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” ²¹ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
²² What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? ²³ What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— ²⁴ even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? - Romans 9:14-24

Debunking Christianity: "Why We Must Treat the Bible No Differently Than Any Other Book" By Biblical Scholar James A. Metzger

J. Michael Straczynski: 'I Would Have Absolutely Zero Right To Complain' About Unauthorized 'Babylon 5' Prequels - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Today, Comics Alliance has also published an Article about J. Michael Straczynski's further comments today regarding his role in DC's plans in publishing more Watchmen stories. He answer the really great question of would he feel any different than Alan Moore does if Warner Brothers tried to redo, reboot, or mess with Babylon 5 without his blessing or involvement. Good reading

J. Michael Straczynski: 'I Would Have Absolutely Zero Right To Complain' About Unauthorized 'Babylon 5' Prequels - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Parting Shot: Image Comics Publisher Calls Watchmen Prequels 'A Dirty Deal' - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

This comment has changed my opinion on Alan Moore's resistance to having DC publishing the characters in Watchmen in new stories without his input.

Mr Stephenson makes a good point. I did not realize that Gibbons and Moore had a deal and DC did not honor it!

Parting Shot: Image Comics Publisher Calls Watchmen Prequels 'A Dirty Deal' - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Answering Muslims: William Federer: Mohammed's History

Here is a video on Muhammad's life. Thanks to David Wood for calling attention to it.

Mohammed's History from Calvary Chino Hills on Vimeo.

Answering Muslims: William Federer: Mohammed's History

Internet Usage Predictions [infographic] | Daily Infographic

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Scholar Interview: Peter J. Williams - Apologetics 315

This week's interview from Brian Auten was really interesting. He spoke to Dr Peter J Williams. I really enjoyed it and found his views and methods at looking at Biblical reliability extremely useful. He had a great deal of advice and knowledge worth taking to heart.

Scholar Interview: Peter J. Williams - Apologetics 315

FacePlant of the Day Not Even an Omniscient God Could Convince Me That I Willfully Reject Christianity Against the Overwhelming Evidence

Just when I can't think John Loftus could not write anything more outlandish, he exceeds himself. Let's examine this latest "gem".

I cannot conceive of an omniscient God being able to do this given all that I know about Christianity, the Bible, theology, philosophy, science, and the history of the church.

Think about what he is saying: an omniscient God is incapable of convincing him that Christianity is true because he knows too much. In order to even think of such a thing, one would have to imagine that their own level of knowledge must border on omniscience - all knowledge. I mean does he really think that if God knows everything God does not know what would convince him....I mean Loftus claimed that he once was convinced. Was Loftus ignorant then? How can he be so sure now if he thinks he was so wrong then?

For God to do this he would have to re-create this universe and basically rewrite history itself.

God isn't just omniscient. God is also omnipotent therefore he could if he wanted to, but why would he have to. In effect, Loftus is suggesting that if God wanted to convince him God would have re-create everything in a way in line with how Loftus thinks reality should be. Does that make sense? Not to me. If there is a God, so far above and beyond myself, I wouldn't expect that God to do anything in which he must align His purposes with me, but that I should align myself to him.

But what is done is done. If however, it takes omniscience (or near omniscience) to show the Christian faith is true, then God should also know that without it I could not think otherwise.

It's been stated over and over again - many atheists like Loftus demand a standard of evidence that they would not demand regarding anything else. The Bible does not tell us that it takes omniscience in order to find Him. It's not about just proving that Christianity is ontologically true its about knowing and relating to God. I agree that Christianity is true, but without knowing Jesus for yourself, what good is that knowledge? None.

I might be wrong. But not even an omniscient God can show me that I willfully reject Christianity against the overwhelming evidence given that I am not omniscient and given what I find in this world. What the evidence leads me to think is that the Christian faith is wildly improbable.

I find it amazing that "improbable" is good enough for John Loftus to turn his back on Jesus - and admitting that he could be wrong. He has written many times that "improbable things" happen with an astounding frequency., and therefore gambling that the Bible is wrong (and given that he can't prove that it is) is a fool's bet.

Debunking Christianity: Not Even an Omniscient God Could Convince Me That I Willfully Reject Christianity Against the Overwhelming Evidence

Debate: Craig Evans & Bart Ehrman 2012 - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted links to the 2-night debate between Dr Craig Evans and Dr Bart Ehrman. The Debate topic was: Does the New Testament present a reliable portrait of the Historical Jesus? You can use the following link to Apologetics 315 to get links to both video and audio.

Debate: Craig Evans & Bart Ehrman 2012 - Apologetics 315

Alan Moore And 'Before Watchmen' Creators Comment On The Ethics Of 'Watchmen' Prequel - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

The cast of Watchmen, created in 1986 by Gibbo...

Image via Wikipedia

One of the big stories today was that DC Comics will be presenting a group of miniseries that will be prequels to the epic The Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. Comics Alliance has done an excellent job reporting on the fall-out of this news. It's important because it brings up issues about how creators own their stories and who has the right to interpret and re-interpret another's work. And who gets paid! Of course Mr Moore claims its about principle and not about money but I think J. Michael Straczynski's comments best explain the issues.

J. Michael Straczynski, via Comic Book Resources:

We are all being very meticulous in how we tie in the events of our stories with the original "Watchmen." The first time we all met secretly in New York to discuss all this, we kept copies of "Watchmen" close at hand and whenever a question was raised about what happened to whom and when, we'd flip through looking for the slightest clue. I joked at the time that it looked like Saturday afternoon Bible Study.

I was very careful to stay within the parameters of what Alan created for Dr. Manhattan. But at the same time, you need the elbow room to create a story worth telling, which means something new has to be created. In this case, it came through looking at what Alan had done and asking the next logical question within that framework. As one example: it's always bothered me that someone as brilliant and precise about time as Jon could just blithely walk into the intrinsic field test chamber as the time-lock closed. He'd know better than that. But since it did happen, you now have to say, "Okay, that being the case, how did it happen? Is there something we don't know? Or more to the point, was there something he didn't know?"

Read More: http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/02/01/alan-moore-dave-gibbons-before-watchmen-creators-quotes-ethics-prequel/#ixzz1lCW1hTZX

Alan Moore And 'Before Watchmen' Creators Comment On The Ethics Of 'Watchmen' Prequel - ComicsAlliance | Comic book culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Answering Muslims: James White Responds to Kamal Saleh

Oh well, David Wood has beaten me to posting a summary on issues surrounding Kamal Saleh's Video Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus - Muslim Version. To understand what happen you have to realized that Saleh's video is itself a response to Jefferson's Bethke's poem Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus. Therefore here is Bethke's video

Now look at Kamal Saleh's video.

See it? Big difference a really big difference. Fortunately, Dr James White teamed up with a lyricist,Ivey Conerly, to rebutt Saleh's errors. Here is that video. Dr White provided the theology and historical background and Conerly put the information into a poem

James White also provided a background video for those who want to hear this information in prose.

Answering Muslims: James White Responds to Kamal Saleh

Check out how Saleh tried to copy Bethke to twist the message and how Dr White and Conerly answered his claims. Saleh had not presented anything new, but it never hurts to revisit truth.

Earlier today Ivey Conerly was a guest on James White's podcast and they discussed all of this. You can follow this link to hear it:
Today on a Special Edition of the Dividing Line

Blaise’s Best Bet, Part 1: an Introduction to Blaise Pascal | Reflections

Dr Kenneth Samples is beginning a series of articles about Blaise Pascal. It's a introduction to the man and his work. Take a look.

Blaise’s Best Bet, Part 1: an Introduction to Blaise Pascal | Reflections

Monday, January 30, 2012

Answering Muslims: Michael Coren on Fox News Discussing Canadian "Honor" Killings

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Why Loving Jesus Is More Than A Religion

Jefferson Bethke's poem on YouTube, Why I hate Religion But Love Jesus, continues to inspire people - negatively and positively. I think that most of the negative reaction spins from a misunderstanding due to people's own traditions. I want to point to two responses that show case the difference between how Bethke's worldview and Atheism and Roman Catholicism. In case you missed my first post on Bethke's poem, please watch his video below

As for A Roman Catholic version, watch this one:

I see a fundamental difference between this video and Betheke's. This particular YouTuber is arguing that the only way you can have a relationship with Jesus is through guidance from the Roman Catholic Church. This was one of the main points of contention that started the Protestance reformation and after almost 500 years it is still relevant. Did Jesus really give us all we need to get to God or do we need more? The Reformer's answer to that is question was "Yes", so is Betheke's and so is mine. And like Bethke, the Reformers were not saying Church is not necessary or important, but that we don't need the traditions of men or to be self-righteous. We don't need a chorelist of do's and don'ts because God can and will help us to obey his commands but obeying his commands is not what saves us because none of can be sinless and perfect. Jesus is the only way - not Jesus plus your keeping church sacrements and following the Pope. Betheke is simply learned that what Jesus said is true and unfortunately many church-going people, let-alone non-Christians, miss this point.

23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” - John 4:23-24

As for an Atheistic comment, you can watch the following video. Be forewarned it contains profane language and is most definitely not safe for work (NSFW).

Like every atheist that I've ever encountered, this man is unable to see a difference between having a relationship with Christ and with Religion. I think Jefferson Bethke gets the difference. Bethke is advocating not ritually attending church or working for others as a to-do-list to please other people or to earn your way into God. He's talking about surrendering your life to Jesus and putting yourself at His disposal because you love Him. I totally agree with Bethke. The closer you get to Jesus, the more you see what you are - and it's not pretty. When TheAmazingAtheist hears Christians talk of a relationship with Christ he reveals that he thinks that means Jesus is like some Pal, or Buddy, you can sit down with and "play XBox" or have brewskies with. I think a lot of people make that mistake. What the Bible teaches is that "relationship" means "Lord" and "servant". We obey and worship Him. I don't know the last time you worshiped the dude you play XBox with, but I doubt you would. What does the Bible says that relationship should look like and on which it is based? I'd argue that all 66 books of the canonical Bible answers this question but I will offer two of those passages.

.¹⁸ “Come now, let us settle the matter,”
   says the LORD.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
   they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
   they shall be like wool. Isaiah 1:18

¹ As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, ² in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. ³ All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. ⁴ But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, ⁵ made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. ⁶ And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, ⁷ in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. ⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. - Ephesians 2:1-10

The Bible very clearly tells us that Jesus is our only way to turn away the wrath of a holy God. Who deserves eternal damnation and punishment for their sins? ALL OF US.

²¹ But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. ²² This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, ²⁴ and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. ²⁵ God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— ²⁶ he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. - Romans 3:212-25

That is why we need a savior. Someone to take the punishment we deserve,. No one in your Church can do that. It's either going to be you atoning for your sins or it's gonna be Jesus. You wouldn't survive paying such a debt. It takes the grace and mercy of God to see this, understand this, let alone accept it. It goes against every fiber of human ego and self-centeredness. Was there something special about you or good in you that caused Jesus to die for you in your place? Nope (Back to Ephesians 2). God chose to do it for us even when we didn't know we need it and didn't ask Him to do it. Should you love Jesus more than anyone or anything else? Yup. But what else did Jesus say? He tells us to love our parents and families and treat them well. I wonder if TheAmazingAtheist has read all of the Gospels? I ask because if he had, wouldn't he know that he misunderstood Matthew 10:32-29. Jesus was not saying that you should ignore or mistreat your family because you love him. How do I know?

³ Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? ⁴ For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ ⁵ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ ⁶ they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. ⁷ You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
   ⁸ “‘These people honor me with their lips,
   but their hearts are far from me.
⁹ They worship me in vain;
   their teachings are merely human rules.’” - Matthew 15:3-9

How could Jesus, a scant 5 Chapters later chastise the religious leaders of his day for teaching people ditching their obligations to their families to perform religious ritual if that is what he had taught in Matthew 10? Let me help you: He didn't. Even the most skeptical person wouldn't really be crazy enough to try to argue that Matthew 10 and Matthew15 are contradictory and mutually exclusive and no one noticed for 2000 years - given that it was is written by the same author - regardless if you reject that it was the Apostle Matthew. Please, let's try to stay consistent.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Pious Bologna:Republicans, Ronald Reagan, & Revisionist History

I think that this particular post is timely, give the rhetoric I keep hearing Republican Presidential hopefuls trying to invoke Regan like some magic formula or some thing or other. This post is well worth checking out especially since it includes the following chart of how much the National Debt increased during the administrations of all the Presidents since Regan. It says a lot.

Still want the good ole days, Mr Newt Gingrich?

Pious Bologna:Republicans, Ronald Reagan, & Revisionist History

The Angry Bird Effect

Look the politicians and pundits are all wrong. The....real reason for the economic decline

Just a joke.

The Angry Bird Effect

Friday, January 27, 2012

Religion: Can You “Hate Religion, But Love Jesus?”

Jefferson Bethke has posted a video that has gone viral in which he explains how he hates religion but loves Jesus Christ. I think that it is more than awesome. It's not just a rant on religion. It could be a lyrical manisfesto defining what a Christian is! It is so profound. So spirit-filled that I think it's been misunderstood by many people. I wanted to post this video but I wanted to also post a link to an article representative of some of thing people are saying. For example, here at Religion: Can You “Hate Religion, But Love Jesus?”, Rippa writes:

So check out the following video and tell me: can it be possible to love Jesus and hate religion at the same time? Personally, it sounds kind of contradictory to me, and presents itself to be quite the non-secular paradox. I mean let’s face it: there would be no Christianity without Jesus, no? Of course there would be no Christianity without Jesus. Which really makes me question the people who say, “I’m not religious nor do I believe in religion, but I am spiritual.” I mean, what’s the difference? No really? Aren’t they one in the same? I’ono, but wut’chu think about it tho?

I think a lot of people see little difference between being religious and being spiritual. This is what Bethke is talking about. The problem is that in our society there isn't anything different between being spiritual and being religious. But this is not what Jesus offers us. Jesus offers us a relationship. Through out the Bible - Old and New Testament - God is reaching out for humanity. Here, please watch this!

I fully agree with everything Bethke has said.here. He is not talking about how to find God or make God do what you want. Often times when I hear apostates talk about leaving Christianity, this what they walked away from - a list of do's and don'ts - but not about leaving their relationship with Jesus. They never even had that relationship. It was missing. Without that - without the understanding that Bethke articulated, you are not a born-again Christian. This isn't religion. Religion is centered around an organization and prescribed attitudes and behaviors that people have to follow on a regular basis. The thing is sometimes you end up just going through the motions. You can be a regular church-goer, and follow all the rules and regulation and not be born-again. This is what Bethke is rejecting not the church nor Christianity. Bethke said on his Facebook page

If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife…. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.

Again right on and Amen. He's right. I so thank God for giving him this poem. It's been blessing so many people and it's so powerful that it's inspired other to use the format to use their own spin. There is a Muslim version repeating most of the same-refuted-but-still-raised arguments Muslims use against Christianity. Here is such a video.

James White is preparing a rebuttal to this video but you can read Tur8infan's rebuttal at this link: Why I Love Jesus and Keep His Commandments

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Holiness of God and Substitionary Atonement are all through the Bible

Somethings just can't be ignored but must be answered. The Holiness of God and Substitutionary Atonement must be defended and taught. Without these two concepts we don't have Christianity. This post takes very special care in rebutting arguments against these two pillars in Christian Theology. Read it at the following link:

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: The Holiness of God and Substitionary Atonement are all through the Bible

Offensive Anti-Obama Ad Depicts Him As Captain Of A Slave Ship

Racist? Yes. Wrong? Yes. Mark Oxner should be ashamed of himself endorsing such an ad. I don't understand how anyone could not see how an ad like that would not raise a red flag or why would anyone think that saying an African American was like a slave ship captain would not be offensive? I sure don't want someone like that in congress.

Offensive Anti-Obama Ad Depicts Him As Captain Of A Slave Ship

SOPA & PIPA Explained [infographic]

Gingrich: Adultery Makes Me More Human Than Mitt "Only Sexes Up His Wife" Romney - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob

Danielle Belton has posted an article that I think everyone should consider. Newt Gingrich has been in national politics for decades now and his personal issues and failing have been public knowledge. She wrote:

Presidential wannabe Newt Gingrich tried to pull that off in an interview with CBN's David Brody where Gingrich tried to spin his "past weaknesses" as making him more "human" than everyone's favorite Republican Robot, Mitt Romney.

What a really weird way to spin his situation and attack his opponent! I have not heard Gingrich publicly acknowledge what he has done as wrong, but he does admit that he did them. He is basically saying that Romney is too perfect and people can identify with him better because Gingrich is more human. I think its important to remember that each one of us are sinners who fall short of God's standards - no one is perfect. We should acknowledge our errors and move on, but not glory in them let alone attack another because they have not done what you have done! Romney is just a man and sinner like all of us. There is no need to attack him for that.If the President of the United States must be sinless - no one could be elected.

Gingrich: Adultery Makes Me More Human Than Mitt "Only Sexes Up His Wife" Romney - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob

Debunking Christianity: "My Christianity is Right"

And this is how you know when you are doing it wrong. It's not "your Christianity" or "my Christianity" any more than it makes sense to talk about "my Calculus" or :"your Quantum Mechanics". There are historically defined terms for what Christianity is and what it isn't. This graphic unfortunately captures how some people think - both those who embrace such silliness and those who reject Christianity.

Debunking Christianity: "My Christianity is Right"

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Ehrman's Problem: A Critique by Clay Jones - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted links to a series of articles in which Dr. Clay Jones critiques Dr. Bart Ehrman's book on the problems of evil and suffering, entitled "God's Problem". Ehrman really seems to think that the Bible does not offer an adequate theodicy for explaining suffering and evil. I disagree. You can read why Jones disagree by visiting Brian Auten's blog to get the links to Jones' articles.

Ehrman's Problem: A Critique by Clay Jones - Apologetics 315

Stan Lee Talks 'With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story' | Video | MTV

English: Stan Lee at the 2010 Comic Con in San...

Image via Wikipedia

Stan Lee, the writer who co-created some of the most recognizable fictional characters ever, has a new documentary based on his life and career coming out. He has three short video interviews promoting the documentary. I love hearing his stories of how he paved the way for all these awesome stories and fiction that explore so much of reality and the human condition in such entertaining ways.

Get More: MTV Shows

Stan Lee Talks 'With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story' | Video | MTV

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Answering Muslims: Does the Qur'an Claim That the Bible Has Been Corrupted?

Here is a short three-part series of video discussing the Islamic claim that the Qur'an says that that the Bible has been corrupted. Follow the link to Answering Muslims so you can see the videos.

Answering Muslims: Does the Qur'an Claim That the Bible Has Been Corrupted?

Who Cares About Romney's Money? What Matters Is How He'd Tax It - News - GOOD

Here is an important infographic that everyone should see. We need to know how potential presidents would vote on proposed changes in tax if they were elected. It's an interactive infographic so follow the link to get the full effect.

Who Cares About Romney's Money? What Matters Is How He'd Tax It - News - GOOD

January 11,2012 Michael Licona debated Shane Puckett on the Resurrection of Christ. Thanks to Brian Auten, we have the video and audio. Go to his website to get them!

Michael Licona vs Shane Puckett Debate: Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? - Apologetics 315

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Friday, February 3, 2012

Related articles

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Related articles

Related articles

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Related articles

Related articles

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Monday, January 30, 2012

Related articles

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Related articles

Related articles

Friday, January 27, 2012

Related articles

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Related articles

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Related articles

Related articles